Saim wrote:Depends on who in Israel, this is not a homogenous society we're talking about. Many ultraorthodox Jews and other Zionist hardliners actively want Israel to occupy all of Palestine, and others who are not that radical are still often too blinded by hate and paranoia to contemplate what concrete steps they could take to end the conflict.
That is actually far from truth. It’s exactly haredim/ultraorthodox Jews who are against the existence of Israel. For them only the true messiah should gather the exiles in the Holy Land (therefore they refuse to abide by its laws). Same with the Zionists. Zionism is not synonymous with imperialism. Zionism goal per se is developing the state of Israel and not enlarging its borders and occupying Palestine territories. I don't doubt there are chauvinists in Israel as in every country, but these are just unfounded conjectures. Anyway, I wonder where you’ve got that information from.
Saim wrote:An important thing to note is that from their point of view, they've already made compromises that have been rejected by the Arabs - a big sore point that Israelis tend to highlight is that the Arabs didn't accept the original UN partition plan, resulting in the 1948 war where Arab states invaded Israel and then the exodus of Sephardic and Mizrahi Jews from Muslim-majority countries. Unfortunately the concurrent Palestinian Nakba (exodus of Arabs from Israel into the West Bank, Jordan, Syria and diaspora) is not as widely reflected on in mainstream Israeli politics.
I would say that “from the point of view of an educated human being”. Arabs did not accept any plan that would include an existence of state of the Jews in the Middle East (even in 1967 during Khartoum Arab Summit they adhered “No peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, no negotiation with Israel”). Originally there would be two independent sovereign states with Jerusalem as enclave. Palestine would have much greater territory then it had after the War of Independence or al-Nakba if you will. And indeed, a great number of Arabs fled the area for more secure locations in the Gaza Strip and West Bank and in the neighbouring Arab states, but it also should be noted that Israel, a tiny country comparing to its neighbours countries, received FAR greater number of refugees from Europe and Arab states, and made them equal citizens despite the great cultural and language barrier (Palestinians have equal rights in Israel as well!!). Whereas the Palestinians who fled to neighbouring Arab countries were (are) kept in internment camps and never became equal, even after 2 or 3 generations. And why? To keep their national consciousness strong enough and to ensure future fedayeen actions.
A report from European university institute: http://cadmus.eui.eu/bitstream/handle/1814/10792/CARIM_RR_2009_08REV.pdf?sequence=3
The justifications for such an exclusion from international protection mechanisms are various. They are not, however, in line with the overwhelmingly accepted conviction of the need to ensure and enhance respect for basic human rights for each person, regardless of nationality, religion, ethnicity and gender. This paper has both challenged the approach of international law and international organizations and has largely rejected arguments used to justify the politics of exclusion exercised by a series of host Arab states in the name of Palestinian national interest. The basic rights of Palestinian refugees, including their right to a legal status (the right to have rights) cannot be sacrificed in the name of their right to return.
linguoboy wrote:We don't have any third-party confirmation that most of the civilian dwellings, school, hospitals, and the like which have been destroyed by the IDF were actually being used for military purposes at the time. The Palestinians living and working in them deny it. The IDF, from what I've seen, rarely issues specific justifications for why particular buildings were targeted.
It follows logically that there is no such a confirmation, and there won’t be, because it’s simply impossible. However, Palestinians do get at least warnings before such an action is taken. More than 2000 rockets have been fired at Israel since the beginning of the operation targeting civilians and no warning, but it’s just fine because most of them were intercepted right? So absurd....http://www.algemeiner.com/2014/07/15/palestinian-officials-openly-fault-hamas-for-war-crimes/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DjzS27ylCZ8
The missiles that are now being launched against Israel – each and every missile constitutes a crime against humanity, whether it hits or misses, because it is directed at civilian targets
linguoboy wrote:Yes, it's very "unfortunate", isn't it? But not so unfortunate that you can't get some enjoyment from it.
What this sarcastic remark is supposed to prove? A moral decay? Sure all the Israelis got the pleasure from it and all the Palestinians in Gaza suffer.